‘Bayanihan 2 not enough stimulus for recovery’

MANILA, Philippines — The P165-billion Bayanihan to Recover as One Act, or the Bayanihan 2 Law, would not suffice to sustain the needed economic recovery from recession caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

House leaders said this yesterday as they pushed for more measures to complement Bayanihan 2 in jumpstarting the economy.

Deputy Speaker LRay Villafuerte and assistant minority leader Stella Quimbo both pushed for the passage of the proposed COVID-19 Unemployment Reduction Economic Stimulus Act (CURES) and Accelerated  Recovery and Investments Stimulus for the Economy Act (ARISE), which will provide P1.5 trillion and P1.3 trillion in funds, respectively, for various economic recovery programs.

“We are hoping the P165-billion outlay set in this consolidated version that will be ratified by both chambers of the Congress would just be an initial stimulus package, given the huge amount that we legislators in the House believe is needed to spell a strong and early recovery for the sectors reeling from the global economic crisis triggered by the coronavirus pandemic,” Villafuerte said in a statement.

With this, he appealed to Malacañang “to raise more resources in the months ahead to fund further stimulus packages needed for an early and strong economic rebound,” particularly the House-approved CURES and ARISE.

The Camarines Sur representative explained that both measures would provide aggressive spending to energize the economy and ease the pandemic’s impact on its worst-hit sectors.

Quimbo made the same appeal, saying the expected P2.4-trillion revenue losses in the country’s economy this year could be turned around if the government comes up with a stimulus program worth at least P1.5 trillion.

“Under ARISE, we have a comprehensive plan to address the economic crisis. ARISE proposes P1.3 trillion over three years. Special attention is given to our small businesses who are most in need of resources in order to stay afloat, with P60 billion allocated for MSME (micro, small, and medium enterprises) loans and assistance under DTI (Department of Trade and Industry) and SBC (Small Business Corp.),” the Marikina lawmaker explained.

Quimbo likened the Bayanihan 1 law to a “first aid” for the economy, while Bayanihan 2 was the “emergency room,” adding that the proposed ARISE will be the needed “surgery.”

Speaker Alan Peter Cayetano, for his part, said the 2021 General Appropriations Act (GAA) will also be crucial in reviving the economy.

He said the House would propose a COVID-19 fund amounting to P500 billion under the national budget next year.

“All our energy for the whole month of August will be used for the 2021 budget. It’s hard enough to make a budget when times are certain; how much more now when there is a lot of uncertainty. That’s why one of the things Congress will push for is to have a P250 billion to P500 billion fund for anti-COVID or COVID-related programs,” the Taguig-Pateros representative revealed.

Cayetano had earlier proposed the allocation of funds for the procurement and distribution of vaccines in the 2021 budget.

Trading barbs

Behind the approval of the reconciled bill of the proposed Bayanihan 2 Law was apparently a rift between House and Senate leaders in the bicameral conference committee.

Deputy Speakers Villafuerte and Dan Fernandez traded barbs with Senate Majority Leader Migs Zuribi and Minority Leader Franklin Drilon over the controversial P10-billion funding infrastructure projects proposed in the House version of the measure, following the approval of the consolidated version of the measure last Thursday.

Villafuerte hit back at Drilon, who reportedly insinuated that the House contingent had pushed for the P10-billion funding for tourism infrastructure under the Bayanihan 2 law allegedly “for personal gain.”

Drilon said their Senate contingent had “blocked” the House contingent’s plan to have the funding for the construction of comfort rooms in tourist spots as well as roads en route to tourism destinations amid the COVID-19 pandemic, even if tourist destinations remain largely closed.

“We did not agree to use the P10 billion for building toilets in tourist areas because we believed that this will not help tourism enterprises and displaced workers in the tourism industry,” Drilon was quoted as saying in Filipino in an interview.

In response, Villafuerte dismissed the opposition senator’s insinuation as “pure grandstanding” and “sourgraping.”

Villafuerte believed that Drilon’s comments were inappropriate because they were made after Bayanihan 2 was ratified.

“This is the first time that our counterparts are sourgraping after a bicameral panel discussion where both chambers already agreed and signed the report,” he pointed out.

“May we humbly request which exact provisions they are insinuating regarding ‘personal gains?’ The House (contingent) would gladly address any concern. It is very unprofessional to question a report they signed and approved,” he added.

The Camarines Sur representative also labeled as “fake news” Drilon’s claim that the insistence of the House contingent delayed the approval of the reconciled bill.

“With all due respect to our Senate counterparts, it’s best just to release the transcripts even the video recording of the whole proceedings so the people can determine who’s telling the truth and who actually delayed the approval of the measure,” Villafuerte said.

Fernandez, for his part, questioned why Zubiri and other senators were scoffing at the consolidated Bayanihan 2 bill when the chamber’s contingent to the bicam panel had given its nod to the measure.

Fernandez accused the senators of “showboating in  aid of reelection.”

“If our high and mighty senators feel that the consolidated Bayanihan 2 bill was not up to their standards, then why did they approve it during the bicam talks? The truth is  a majority of the good features of Bayanihan 2 were actually introduced by the  House and were only  adopted by the Senate,” the Laguna representative stressed.

“These senators appear conflicted. They want to make it appear that they did their part in passing Bayanihan 2, obviously to worm their way into the good graces of an  overwhelming majority of our people who support President Duterte and are appreciative of his Administration’s comprehensive COVID-19 response measures, but they are at the same time distancing themselves from the bill, obviously  to please the ragtag band of anti-government critics,” Fernandez added.

Villafuerte, who headed the House contingent in the bicam, also turned the tables on Drilon.

“Why is Senator Drilon strongly against the P10-billion infrastructure for tourism (that) we wanted when he strongly pushed for billions of infrastructure funding for Iloilo, particularly (for) the construction of the P800 million Iloilo Convention Center and the P8.8-billion Iloilo International Airport, among others?” Villafuerte stressed.

“If he pushed for almost P9 billion worth of infrastructure funding in Iloilo to promote tourism , why can’t the whole country avail of P10 billion for tourism infrastructure? We can cite more areas where billions have been spent for infrastructure projects to promote tourism?” the House leader argued.